1. Report: Stockholm conference on “Climate
Change, Trade and Standardisation – in a
development perspective” (CCTS),
23-25 November, 2009
by Fredric Stany, SIS and Anna Sabelström, National Board of Trade

2. 2
Summary
The Stockholm conference on “Climate change, trade and standardisation – in a
development perspective” showed, that international standards, used in a proper
way, can contribute in the fight against climate change, have a potential to
foster trade with climate-friendly technology and could be an engine for
economic growth in developing countries. However, there are many challenges
for developing countries, their standard setters and stakeholders turning
international standards to become a global tool for climate and development
objectives.
International standards can contribute to climate change objectives, but need to
be complemented by other tools. The most essential role of standards would be
to measure and report GHG emissions, facilitate trade in low carbon goods, and
transfer climate-friendly technology. Standards could also deliver a metric how
to compare mitigation efforts cross countries and to provide a framework for
the assessment of climate-friendly goods and services.
Since many developing countries have not yet managed to tap into the CDM
mechanism, the implementation of climate change related standards could
improve their participation. Energy efficiency measures deliver important
possibilities for developing countries to contribute to climate mitigation with
low costs. Developing international standards in this area could facilitate such
efforts.
Complying with climate related standards enable industry to manage GHG
emissions along the supply chain, using it as a strategic business response - not
only as an answer to consumer pressure but also to show profitability, e.g.
towards shareholders and investors.
Earlier experiences with private food safety standards, creating trade barriers
for developing countries, should be taken into account when sustainable and
climate standards are developed. International standards need a more holistic
approach that considers economic, social and environmental dimensions.
Developing countries need to become standard setters instead of standard
takers. Consideration must be taken to the realities and priorities in developing
countries, which can be different from those that pertain to the developed
world. To meet the various needs from stakeholders in those countries, they
also need to involve their stakeholders in standardisation work. by raising
awareness on the benefits of standards, and building necessary technical
capacity and infrastructure to influence standards development by national
stakeholders. Analysing the economic and social benefits of standards for
developing countries could encourage stakeholders to participate in the
standardisation process.
Developing countries need to make priorities on where to be active in the
standardisation work. Building national strategies for standardisation is
therefore important.

3. 3
Background
The Stockholm conference was arranged by SIS and financed by the Swedish
Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Sida – The Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency, and ISO- the International Organisation for
Standardisation. The conference is one of the outcomes of the Swedish Trade
Minister´s announcement at the informal trade minister meeting on the
UNFCCC climate negotiations in Bali in December 2007, pointing out that it
would be a challenge to find a balance between setting climate standards in
order to mitigate greenhouse gases and, on the other hand, not creating new
barriers to trade, in particular for developing countries.
The conference is part of the Swedish Climate Standards Project aiming to
strengthen developing countries’ opportunities to increased trade with climate
friendly goods and services by the means of international standards and making
climate friendly technology more accessible to these countries.
An international standard on Carbon Footprint of Products, ISO 14067, is
currently developed by ISO. The aim of the standard is to harmonize methods
to measure, report, and verify the greenhouse gas emissions caused by products.
Earlier, other ISO standards have been developed with the purpose to measure
emissions related to the industry.
Results
The conference gave a unique opportunity for the participants and the lecturers
to discuss questions related to climate change, trade and standardisation with a
specific focus on developing countries needs and challenges.The speeches
increased knowledge and awareness of the interlinkages between global trade
and climate-related standards. During the break-out sessions, developing
countries discussed how standardisation could become an effective tool for
developing countries and generated substantial input on key activities to
enhance the capacity of developing countries to take advantage of new trade
opportunities. This input will serve as a basis for new initiatives related to
climate-related standardisation.
Could standards be a trade policy tool for combating climate change?
The benefits of international standards for climate change objectives
Several speakers emphasized the role of standards as the foundation for
successful GHG management. Standards are important for how to measure
and report greenhouse gas emissions. International agreed standards could give
a metric how to compare mitigation efforts cross countries. There is a need of
tools to compare the level of effort involved, in particular in post-Kyoto
commitments. For example, comparison of cap-and- trade schemes and border
taxes measures is where standards could play a role.
Another role standards could play is to foster the change of production patterns
e.g. product standards in the field of energy efficiency. Here, standards
potentially could make a strong contribution to mitigate GHG emissions.

4. 4
However, so far government policies for energy efficiency rarely consider
electricity production or electricity supply. Rather, they are based on
opportunities to save energy on the user phase. 1
Developing countries,
however, use significant amounts of energy to produce products and services. If
they can reduce the energy intensity, developing countries stand to gain quite
quickly.2
As a result, energy efficiency measures deliver an important
possibility for developing countries to contribute to climate mitigation with low
costs. Another important contribution of standards in the field of energy
efficiency is to harmonise energy efficiency initiatives.3
Probably the most essential element according to many speakers is standards role to
facilitate trade in low carbon goods and their contribution to GHG mitigation effort.
One of the basic questions in the trade and climate debate is how we could foster
technology transfer. Governments in this respect have a rather poor role when it
comes to disseminating technology. Lower tariffs – for example liberalisation of low
carbon goods and services - are helpful but more essential are the abolishing of non-
tariff barriers. What we today can see is a lack of energy policy giving price signals
for investors, a lack of legal certainty and a lack of strong legislation in the field of
competition and environment. We could also see a lack of innovation strategies,
know-how and the ability to adapt to a local situation. There is a need of incentives,
innovation and energy strategies. Social consequences are important.4
One question risen was how to achieve the “triple wing” (development, trade and
environment) in the WTO and how to define environmental goods and services for
avoiding misusing achievements for other objectives than for environmental benefits.
One suggestion was to build a framework for assessment with the help of standard
setting. Here, international standardisation might play a role.
In summary, standards as a trade tool could have both positive and negative linkages.
If standards are used properly, they achieve their positive potential in particular for
developing countries. They have a potential to foster trade, to guarantee quality and to
be an engine for economic development. The ability to work with standardisation is
important. It will also affect countries’ competitiveness and national growth.
Standards can also be a means to facilitate trade in low carbon goods and foster
innovation. They can also be a trade policy tool for climate change objectives,
however some participants warned for overestimating the importance of standards, as
they need to be complemented by other tools. The biofuel area is one example where
some countries would like to see political agreements, for example when it comes to
labour conditions.
Standards used improperly like those could be seen in the food miles debate, become
unfair trade barriers and can work against both development and climate objectives.
The challenge would be to exploit positive and help to avoid negative potentials.
1
Oshani Perera, International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
2
Rob Steele, ISO
3
Rod Janssen, ICTSD
4
Aaron Cosbey, IISD

5. 5
The constraints of private voluntary carbon standards for climate change
objectives
The market for private carbon standards has been growing considerable in recent
years, reminding to the eco labelling debate in the 90ies. One reason is that consumer
today pay more for environmental benefits. Moreover, governments generally don’t
like setting technical regulations for moral problems which might be a reason why we
now could see a tendency for private standards. Labelling schemes are used for
different reasons: to satisfy the consumers and help them to reduce their personal
carbon footprint, to demonstrate for lawmakers and investors to fulfil CSR
commitments and to identify hot points in production that can reduce GHG emissions.
Private standards, however, are insufficient incentives in order to address
environmental problems, climate change in particular. Three main problems were
emphasized5
:
First, there is an information overload from a consumer point of view. The capacity
of consumers to figure out the implications of given information from carbon labels is
limited. There is a so called “bounded rationally problem”. The best marketed
schemes have a competitive advantage over other schemes but that does not guarantee
success in generating environmental gains. The style substitutes for content.
Second, the natural drive of market differentiation is important. Different
supermarkets are going into climate labelling. Schemes are not always created for
altruistic reasons like environmental improvements. Retailers wish to differentiate
products, the farm lobby wishes to protect the market, or NGOs creating an income
stream. Consumers are willing to pay a premium, so feasible that supermarkets go into
it. However, we cannot reliably compare between products as a result.
Third, there is a moral offsetting aspect. Consumers feel good about themselves as
feeling more responsibly. However, lower carbon shopping choices can easily be
undermined by one’s choice how to get to the supermarket or how you prepare your
food. We are not carbon labelling our car journeys; instead we set pressure on
exporters.
Finally, the free riders problem. The aim of private carbons standards is to make
informed choices and drive market for low carbon. The assumption is that the
consumer is powerful. However using private standards is still only voluntary,
consumers could chose not to buy them. Even if methodology gets right there is still
only 10% buying these products. There are high cost activities for low carbon
lifestyle, but the neighbour who has done none of that has a competitive advantage.
The constraints of carbon standards for trade objectives
There is a rising number of private schemes and labelled products, but still at
a very small scale.
There is a great diversity in carbon footprint approaches, but this is normal when
standards emerge in a new area. There are relatively few products in most of the
schemes the OECD scrutinized (14), but there appears also products others than
agricultural products like cellphones or bank accounts.6
5
Alexander Kasterine, ITC
6
Dale Andrew, OECD

6. 6
The UK appears as frontrunner. Tescos introduction of a carbon footprint labelling
scheme lead to direct intervention of New Zeeland. As a consequence, the UK
developed through its standardisation organisation the PAS 2050 which for the
moment is the most complete one. Measurement and comparison between schemes is
difficult.
Certification or conformity assessment is expensive and demanding on
human resources
Lessons from organic products can be drawn. Who is going to decide that the standard
has been inhered to, who does the testing, who does the certification process which
then would then get approval by the retailer, the importer and in the end the consumer.
There are many paths to reach that, ISO has also activities. Standard setting is in the
focus but problems when it comes to certification should not be forgotten. Only four
of the schemes the OECD scrutinised live up to consumers preference for independent
3rd
party verification. There can be noticed a general lack of clarity and transparency
in this area.
Data on products, in particular in developing countries is poor.
There is a need to improve capacity to carry out complex GHG assessments for
products. Data is hard to come by and has to be put together. Moreover, verifying of
all life cycle assessment is difficult. If there is no real data available, then average data
and default values will be used. Investment in data collection is needed.
Proposed research issues
1. How might carbon footprint, if scaled up, contribute to climate change mitigation in non-
energy intensive sectors? What would be the trade and market access issues? Would it
support or contradict other regulatory measures?
2. What are the costs of conformity and certification? Most schemes no third party
certification. Will the consumers trust self-verification?
3. How is verification carried out in practice? What systems are best?
4. How can the rigour and cost-effectiveness of LCAs be improved upon?
Climate standards – what is key in turning standards to become a trade
opportunity for developing countries?
ISO standards: contribution and constraints
Climate change is moving fast and is a global issue, so the opportunity here is a
global solution using international standards. However, setting climate
standards takes time. ISO Standards development will take 24-48 months and
then another year to implement it. A private labelling scheme can be developed
and put in practice in six months.
The strong part of international standardisation is to set up how you measure
carbon levels. But this is very different from defining the levels itself.
Standardisation should not be overestimated as a trade policy tool but to also
see the limitations. There exists a toolkit and standardisation is one policy tool
to combat climate change.

7. 7
According to many experts ISOs current standardisation work on carbon
footprint and energy management will be important contributions in the combat
against climate change. Moreover, standards developed nowadays are not just
business-to-business or even business-to-consumer. Climate change standards
are business-to-society aiming to involve a broad spectrum of stakeholders such
as government, consumers, trade and industry, non-government organisations,
etc. So, such standards of today create an opportunity to change societal
behaviours, not only the way companies perform or behave.
Standards and labels becoming trade barriers – an example
Frequently discussed during the conference, was the case of the Food Mile
labelling debate in the UK. The labelling scheme focus on how transportation
of food products from Africa could affect climate. Several speakers expressed
that Food Mile is one example of when a climate label becomes a trade barrier
for developing countries. The problem with this type of labelling scheme is that
it is selective in different ways:
First, it includes only a few types of products on a global market.
Second, with its distinct focus on transportation, it does not capture a life cycle
assessment approach. For example, the fresh products of Africa are generally
produced with quite small greenhouse gas emissions. If a life cycle approach is
considered in climate standards, it could be a competitive advantage for those
farmers on a global market. For a standard to become a realistic trade
opportunity for developing countries, speakers emphasized that a more holistic
approach is requested when it comes to the evaluation and setting of product
criteria.7
Third, the Food Mile label neglects the socio-economic dimensions of
sustainable development. Standards focused on a particular part of a problem
are rarely going to guide people with incentives to behave in ways to support a
sustainable development.
Speakers emphasized that economic development, transfer of technology
(including ´soft technology´ such as trading in skills and good agriculture
practice), and adapting to climate change are urgent needs in the developing
world. The assets developing countries have indicating opportunities for trade
includes low per capita emissions, cheaper labour, and agricultural societies
which means that they tend to have very good farmers that are adaptable taking
on new products and new technologies.8
Standard setting, implementation and certification – a question of cost
With respect to equity, today standards tend to amplify existing inequalities.
The exceptions are where real efforts have been put into the development and
implementation of standards. More trade and standards that deliver global
sustainable development could be a benefit for developing countries if they can
7
Stephen Mbithi, FPEAK
8
James MacGregor, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)

8. 8
tackle the challenges of becoming standard setters instead of standard takers,
to optimise and innovate the standard setting so they become more sustainable.9
Speakers expressed that it is important for developing countries and their
stakeholders to be aware of the benefits of standards setting. Early involvement
in the standardisation process could also facilitate the implementation and
adaptation of standards.
But, costs are involved and the discussions on financial concerns for developing
countries can be structured into three different areas:
First, financing participation in ISO meetings is one area of concern. It is
important being present with negotiation capacity in those meetings in order to
make necessary influence and to make sure the comments made on a working
draft standard win support among delegates from other countries. Another
financial issue but also related to the capacity of developing international
standards, concerns the upgrading and establishment of ICT10
infrastructure and
IT facilities as a necessity to enable remote participation and electronic voting
on ISO meetings.
Second, there are costs related to the implementation of standards. The costs
are high for small companies to learn about how to adopt and apply
methodologies of different environmental standards. They may pay consultants
to carry out work for them to make necessary preparations for implementation,
make sure relevant infrastructure is in place and provide with technical
assistance.
Third, the certification costs for compliance of different standards are in
some cases bigger for small scale farmers in developing countries than the
production costs. To get access to for example the EU and US markets,
companies in developing countries often are forced to implement and adopt a
various numbers of standards. In some cases small scale producers in
developing countries need to comply with up to five or six different standards
to be able to export to Europe. Speakers and participants emphasized that from
a trade point of view, many stakeholders in developing countries usually see
standards as barriers instead of promoters for international trade. Here, the
development of international standards can benefit small scale producers since
it could reduce the work load and the costs for compliance.
The need of raising awareness of standards and labelling schemes
One important activity to enhance the involvement of developing countries in
international standardisation work is to raise awareness among a wide range of
stakeholders in the country. This includes for example awareness of:
• how to get access to information on standard schemes;
• economic, social and environmental benefits of standardisation;
• national and international standardisation processes;
• development, implementation and certification of standards.
9
James MacGregor, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)
10
Information and communication technology

9. 9
It was emphasised that:
First, it is important that there exists a clear ownership of awareness raising
activities at the national level in the recipient country in order to disseminate
knowledge and awareness at the local level.
Second, the awareness should not stop at the level of national standardisation
bodies. It must involve stakeholders from industry and trade, governments,
policy makers, consumer organisations, etc. The awareness gap between the
national standardisation bodies and other stakeholders need to be closed. For
instance, one important area of communication is between the national
standardisation bodies and (trade promoting organisations) policy makers?
discussing areas where the country has competitive advantages and which
standards are related to these areas.11
The need of strategies and setting priorities
Financing active participation and other capacity building activities was seen as
one important contribution to enhance developing countries’ involvement in
international standard-setting. However, needs differ between countries. Since
there are lot of different standards to deal with and the resources in developing
countries are limited, focus is important. Conference discussions suggested
different incentives and approaches for developing countries on how to deal
with the issue of prioritization:
• National strategy on standardisation: It is important for each country to
establish a national strategy setting priorities on where the country should
be involved in international standardisation work. The strategy should be
developed through a consultation process involving relevant stakeholders
from, for example, industry and trade sectors, universities, and
governments in the country. This process has for example been a successful
case in Jordan.12
• Trade and economy: Countrries should be clear about where, and how, it
should be involved from the very start of international standardisation
work. This requires for example an understanding of where the most
important sectors of industry and trade in the country are linked to the
international supply chain. For not running the risk of losing market access,
each country with its own needs and priorities, should ask themselves
where it is important for their economy to participate in the standardisation
work.13
• Technical capacity: Developing countries should strive to actively and
jointly participate in the areas where they, relatively, have the technical
capacity to do that. And, equally important, priority should be given in
areas that may adversely affect them if they do not take part in the
negotiations.
11
Beer Budoo, ISO
12
Nesreen Al-Khammash, Jordan Institution for Standards and Metrology (JISM)
13
Klaus Radunsky, Convenor ISO 14067 ”Carbon Footprint of Products”

10. 10
• Impact assessment: Rigorous impact assessment methodologies should be
developed and promoted for climate standards and labels, not only in terms
of their impact on market access for the less developed countries but also in
terms of their effectiveness to deliver on the environmental objectives they
claim14
Delegates informed about the new ISO methodology to assess the
economic benefits of concensus-based standards, and the developing
countries were encouraged to start using this methodology15
. Quantifying
the economic and social benefits of standards is important, both for the
monitoring and prioritizing of standardization activities and for
communication purposes, in order to encourage support and involvement
from public, private and societal stakeholders at large.
Early involvement in the standardisation process
Responding to the challenges of turning standards to become a trade
opportunity for developing countries requires multiple capacities to be built in
developing countries, political will cross sectors, financial support and a
coherent approach. Experiences from private food safety standards should not
be reiterated.16
Speakers frequently emphasized the importance of building
capacity to ensure involvement in the international standardisation process.
Here, there are three areas of concern:
First, a more proactive approach is needed. The initiatives of preparing the
standards need to be linked with implementing the standards, in terms of tools
to promote trade and to benefit the economy. Otherwise the decision makers
may not be aware of the importance of involvement. Not unusual, the trigger
for developing countries comes first when a standard is becoming a market
access issue.17
It is then too late to be involved in the standard setting since the
standard is already on the market. Compliance is needed for market access but
the knowledge about the standards and its implications are low.
The development of the ISO 26000 on Social Responsibility is one good
example on where the involvement of developing countries was relatively
strong. Discussions in the working group were held on whether the standard
would become a barrier to trade for the developing countries or not. Most of the
participating developing countries thought that the standard would be a
valuable tool for them in order to comply with requirements from customers
and consumers in the developed world.18
Second. it is crucial that relevant stakeholders19
are represented in the
standards development process. For example, climate related standards often
requires analytical capacity in applying life-cycle methodology for the
company´s products and their supply chains, and skills on how to apply the
14
Muge Dolun Bora, UNIDO
15
The ISO methodology and related deliverables are planned to be distributed to all ISO
members in February 2010.
16
Muge Dolun Bora, UNIDO
17
Stephen Mbithi, FPEAK
18
Kristina Sandberg, SIS
19
Stakeholders participating in the standardisation process could be representatives of
interested parties at the national level, including industry and trade, government, academia,
consumer groups, etc.

11. 11
methodology in a production chain to identify cost-effective points of control.
Stakeholders in developing countries need to work together so that they could
be at the temple to discuss issues related to the market access in the early stages
of the standardisation process, making sure that their needs and priorities are
included in the standard.
Thirdly, ensuring that developing countries have the requisite capacity to
effectively use standards and ensure that they can have access to the benefits
arising from new trading opportunities is important.20
For example the standard
on carbon footprint, this requires the determination of product category rules
(PCR) for important sectors of industry and trade in each country. With product
category rules it is meant....It also includes the ability to collect adequate data in
order to make necessary calculations and assessments of for example the carbon
emissions generated through the life cycle of a product.
A good example on proactive standardisation work involving a wide range of
relevant stakeholders is New Zeeland. Their experiences could be helpful for
developing countries, since it is, like many African countries, dependent on
exports of agriculture goods and export markets are distant. In order to be
prepared for a low carbon society, they have made strong efforts to develop
product category rules (PCR) for those products they are exporting. They
cooperate with their research centres and the universities to develop
methodologies to get necessary data in order to inform the market on carbon
footprint. They do participate in all the standardisation processes in order to get
international regulations that are consistence with their own experience and
how, from their perspective, carbon footprint should be calculated.
Investing in greener technology is a strategic business response
International standards could be a powerful tool for disseminating new
technologies and good practices, developing global markets, and supporting the
harmonization of government policies on a global scale. For instance, the ISO
Carbon Footprint standard investigates the carbon emissions along the supply
chain. Speakers emphasized that the standard could be a strategic business
response, encouraging companies to invest in greener technology along the
supply chain. For the investors, it becomes a matter of risk management since
the supply chain emissions will relate to costs that can not be neglected. Today,
more and more large companies know the carbon footprint of their products and
translate the carbon emission savings objectives into monetary savings.21
One opportunity with climate standards is to bring a clear measurement
methodology that could be applied for any organisation and could help to
identify cost effective ways of cutting GHG emissions. Since most developing
countries have not managed to tap into the CDM mechanism, the
implementation of climate change related standards could improve their
participation.22
20
Muge Dolun Bora, UNIDO
21
Klaus Radunsky, Convenor ISO 14067 ”Carbon Footprint of Products”
22
Muge Dolun Bora, UNIDO

12. 12
Conclusions
Standards could be one trade policy tool to combat climate change, if used
properly. One important area for standards is their role to facilitate trade in low
carbon goods and to identify cost effective ways of cutting GHG emissions. In
the area of energy efficiency, standards can play an important role contributing
to low cost GHG mitigation initiatives in developing countries, not only limited
to include energy consumption but also production and distribution of energy.
Climate related standards encourage mitigation activities undertaken by the
industry as a strategic business response.
Becoming a trade opportunity for developing countries, standards need a more
holistic approach considering economic, social and environmental dimensions,
comprising a wide variety of products and services. Harmonising standards
could solve problems with the big flora of private voluntary standards resulting
in information overload, protectionism, and high costs related to compliance.
Developing countries need to become standard setters instead of standard takers
to ensure that standards development implies the needs and priorities of
developing countries. This will require an early involvement of a broad range of
stakeholders, contributing with their expertise and knowledge from different
sectors such as academia, industry and trade, consumers and governance. One
important activity to enhance the involvement of the developing countries in the
international standardisation work is to raise awareness among a wide range of
stakeholders in the country.
Financing active participation in the standardisation process was seen as an
important contribution.However, needs differ between countries. It is important
that developing countries communicate their needs and priorities, so that
initiatives to enhance their capability to actively become involved in
international standardisation work are designed in the best possible way.
Technical capacity and infrastructure for cost efficient implementation and
fulfilling requirements for conformity assessment and certification is needed,.
Data on products in developing countries is poor. Developing countries would
need assistance in developing product category rules for life cycle standards like
the standard on carbon footprint for products.
A national strategy is required for prioritisation of areas of standardisation that
each developing country need to make, primarily based on its needs and
benefits related to trade and economy. Designated awareness raising campaigns
elucidating linkages between trade and standards, for example by providing and
using recognised methodologies for impact assessment of economic benefits
with standardisation, could encourage stakeholders to engage in standard
setting, but also to facilitate national investments in technical capacity and
infrastructure.
Developing countries need access to information on existing climate related standards.
Moreover, access to information on actual involvement of developing countries in
different ISO working groups would be useful for carrying out more research in this
area.

13. 13

14. 14
Appendix –Break-out sessions
The ambition of the break-out sessions was to facilitate and canalize valuable
contributions by the participants. The objective with the sessions was to give
the participants more room for influence, intensify the discussions, and to
assess the needs of new potential initiatives and activities to develop capacity
within the developing countries.
The participants were given the opportunity to participate in one of three
different break-out sessions: Food, Bio-Fuels, and Energy efficiency. The idea
behind the different sessions was to frame the discussions within those different
perspectives in order to generate a more comprehensive approach in answering
the two questions:
1. Which activities could contribute to enhance the developing countries´
capacity to take an active part in the international standardisation work?
2. Which activities could contribute to enhance the developing countries´
capacity of taking advantage of increasing climate-related trade?
For the list of participation related to the different sessions, see appendix.
Suggested activities and initiatives to enhance the developing countries´
capacity to influence international climate standardisation work:
Activity / Initiative - Food
Create awareness amongst suppliers, consumers about importance of
participation in standards setting process
Create national capacity in ICT, knowledge about what is happening in climate
standards development, ability to respond.
Be proactive in climate standards participation
Ensure right people participate (technical people)
Coordinate regional approach on CC standards work
Lobby
Activity / Initiative – Bio-Fuels
AWARENESS BUILDING and NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The interest to be engaged in biofuels, locally, intern.? The needs and goals
for each country differs, help find their advantages and constraints
POLICY DEVELOPMENT developing national strategy – promoting –
developing standards, role of NSG : support legislation, tourism as incentive,
promoting bioenergy
PARTICIPATION IN RELEVANT ISO COMMITTEES reduce the number
of standards to minimize trade barriers
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE in the standardisation work and adopting into
standards
HARMONISATION OF STANDARDS Discrepancies between different
initiatives, e.g. landuse change
Activity / Initiative – Energy efficiency
Establishing national/regional mirror TCs that shadow ISO/IEC TCs to

15. 15
influence the technical content of these international standards according to the
national needs’ of Developing Countries
Conducting assessment to identify the national demands in terms of energy
efficiency standards in consultation with all the relevant stakeholders and the
NSBs in the Devloping Countries
Conducting national awareness programs to highlight the importance of the
International standards in the field of energy efficiency
Building technical capacities in Developing Countries to apply common
methodologies to establish national standardization strategies in a proactive
and effective approach
Promoting the referncing of standards in technical regulations so to reduce the
technical barriers to trade
Suggested activities and initiatives to enhance the developing countries´
capacity of taking advantage of increasing climate-related trade:
Activity / Initiative - Food
Need to have information on climate market opportunities
Have to prove how green goods i.e.
need compliance with and harmonization of standards
Need to promote climate friendly practices in ag systems
create awareness in consumers and producers about what climate friendly
products and processes are (e.g. way to promote energy efficiency and carbon
sequestration)
Capacity building to creating necessary domestic certification and
accreditation structures to support trade in climate friendly goods.
Need to market products internationally
Activity / Initiative – Bio-Fuels
CAPACITY BUILDING
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT, public private
partnership development
”TRANSFER” OF TECHNOLOGY, using standards in CDM
Developing own appropriate technology and assimilating to new technology,
example pilot project
DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION on current standards on climate-
related trade and biofuel initiatives
South-south-trade. Huge possibilities for building regional markets
Activity / Initiative – Energy efficiency
Setting national policies and strategies that consider energy efficiency and
GHG emissions reduction as a key driver in defining and measuring the
performance of products/services
Making the policy makers in the Developing Countries aware about the
standards and the infrastructure needed to implement such standards
Raising awareness about the economical (e.g: cost savings), environmental and
social benefits of using energy efficient products and systems

16. 16
Introducing the concepts of climate change effects and the benefits of using
energy efficent products and green technologies within the schools and
universities educational programs
Providing incentives to encourage the use of climate friendly products in the
Developing Countries
List of participants, Break Out Sessions
Food Bio-Fuels Energy efficiency
Stephen Mbithi, FPEAK, Kenya
(Chairman)
Alexander Kasterine, ITC
(Moderator)
Zukiswa Raditladi, Botswana
Damien Nakobedetse, Burundi
Lucy Ikonya, Kenya
Lilia Ben Abdallah, Tunisia
Thi Thu Huong Do, Vietnam
Joseph Matta, Lebanon
Abdellatief Alshiekh, Palestine
Ebenezer Pinkrah, Ghana
Jessie Gallardo Garcia, Ecuador
Gerel Batochir, Mongolia
Anaclet Birushabagabo, Burundi
Taker Jamil. Bangladesh
A R L Wijesekera, SLSI, Sri
Lanka (Chairman)
Lennart Ryk, EFO AB
(Moderator)
Bakoué Jean Paul Karama,
Burkina Faso
Sujin Jiang, China
Alberto Pimentel Mata,
Guatemala
Gideon Gathaara, Kenya
Manan Lucien Dja, Ivory Coast
Talaibek Ismailov, Kyrgyzstan
Ljupcho Davchev, Macedonia
Julius James, Saint Lucia
Paweena Panichayapichet,
Thailand
Nigmat Karimov, Uzbekistan
Khoo Hock Aun, Malaysia
Paul Walakira, Uganda
Gideon Gathaara, Kenya
Leandri Kinabo, Tanzania
Zul Amri, Indonesia
Hossein Chitsazi, Iran
James Dumbuya, Sierra Leone
Dr Klaus Radunsky, ISO
Nesreen Al-Khammash, JISM,
Jordan (Chairman)
Rod Janssen, ICTSD
(Moderator)
Mohamed Chaieb Aissaoui,
Algeria
Idrissa Semde, Burkina Faso
Francy Ramirez Torres,
Colombia
J Roy Chowdhury, India
Bambang Setiadi, Indonesia
Zul Amri, Indonesia
Rafat Assi, Jordan
Khaled Osman, Syria
Cuong Nguyen Canh, Vietnam
Jawad Abi Aki, Lebanon
Afif Thabet, Tunisia
Mohammed Al-Moliky, Yemen
Aminah Ang, Malaysia
Abderrahim Taibi, Morocco
Aliyu Musa Yauri, Nigeria
Khalid Hussain Langah,
Pakistan
Neranda Maurice, Saint Lucia
Vincent Amelie, Seychelles
Tetyana Gordienko, Ukraine
Roberto Francisco De Aceredo
Escardo, Uruguay
Tony Lampard, Zimbabwe
Sitaram Joshi, Nepal
Claudio Castanon Contreras,
Guatemala
David Kirui, Kenya
Bin Song, Singapore
Pieter Haasbroek, South Africa
Than Zaw, Myanmar